HANNEMANN LAW FIRM, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION F LE

Brian G. Hannemann, Esq., State Bar No. — 166109 i

3:33:99 c. OURT 0F CALIFORNIA
1042 N. Mountain Ave., Suite B—222 St
Arrry 0F SA
AN BERNARDINO
BFRNARDINO DISTRICT
Upland, California 91786
#wN Tel: (909) 980-7878
Fax: (909) 91 2—8999 05c 07 2021
bghesgdfigmaiLcom

Kathleen Doherty, Esq.

kateydohertvfibumailcom
(SBN 3 10608) 6%
1042 N. Mountain Ave., B-596
Upland, CA 91 786 Brenda Matsumura
T: (909) 522-0228
OOOONO‘L/l

F: (909) 912-8084

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

CORPORATION

EDMUND GARCIA
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
912-8999 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
8-222
(909)
EDMUND GARCIA, an individual. ) Case

PROFESSIONAL Sum:
91786
)
Hon;
CIVSB 2133471
)
FACSIMILE

Plaintiff, ) Dept.
AWL,

)
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
CALIFORNIA

) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR:

A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

v. )
UPLAND,

) l. DISCRIMINATION BASED 0N
FIRM, N. (909)
SEXUAL ORIENTATION (GOV T.
1042
§ (ODE § 12940(a))
BENJAMIN ISAAC "BEN" LOPEZ, an ) 2. DISCRI‘MINA HON BASED 0N
LAW
TELEPHONE

individual; CITY OF MONTCLAIR; and ) GENDER (GOV T. LODE§ 12940(a)),

DOES through 50, inclusive,
1 )3 UNLAWFUL SEXUAL HARASSMENT
) 1N VIOL A1 ION 0F FEHA (GOV T.
) C ODE § 129400));
) 4. FAILURE T0 PREVENT
HANNEMANN

) DISCRIMINATION AND
Defendants. ) Rm ALIM ION (00V T. CODE
) § 12940(k))-
) 5. R13 1 ALIATION (GOV T. C0DE§
) 1294mm
)

) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

INTRODUCTION
“A hypocrite is the kind of politician who would cut

down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and

make a speech for conservation."

-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNC'I‘IVI‘I RELIEF
 .

Adlai Stevenson

QOMPLALET
Plaintiff EDMUND GARCIA complains of Defendants CITY OF MONTCLAIR,
BENJAMIN ISAAC “BEN” LOPEZ, an individual, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, as

WWQQM$WNH follows:

VENUE AED PARTIES

l. Plaintiff EDMUND GARCIA (hereinafter “Plaintifi”) is a male, over the age of
eighteen, and a resident of the County of San Bemardino, State of California.

CORPORATION

2. Defendant CITY OF MONTCLAIR, is qualified to and actually doing business

in the State of California, with its principal place of business located at 51 11 Benito Street,

912-8999
Montclair, CA 91763.
8-222
(909)
3. Defendant BENJAMIN ISAAC “BEN” LOPEZ (hereinafier “Lopez”) was at all
PROFESSIONAL Sun‘s
91786

times relevant hereto an employee of CITY OF MONTCLAIR and a supervisor of Plaintiff and a
FACSIMILF.

Ava,
current resident of the State of California, residing within the County of San Bemardino at 4853
CALIFORNIA

<>

San Bernardino Street, Montclair, Califomia 91763.

A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
4. Defendant Lopez ran for elected office under a staunch politically conservative
FIRM, N. (909)

1042
NNNNNNNNNu—nr—lr—nfl—wn—np—An—nn—h
platform, and secured a seat on Defendant City of Montclair’s City Council. Starting as early as

Lopez served 0n the Anaheim-chapter of Traditional Values

TELEPHQNE

LAW 2003 to as recently as 2015,

Coalition (TVC), a designated anti-LGBTQ hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center
“\lGM-bWNF-‘oowflamhwk’flo

(SPLC). During those 12 years, he served as their director, lobbyist, and spokesperson and
HANNEMANN

“publicly advocated against and attacked same-sex marriage, LGBTQ history curriculums, and the
legal recognition and protections of transgender people. He also made highly exclusionary and

rejectionist anti-LGBTQ remarks.

5. Defendants CITY OF MONTCLAIR, and Does 1-25 shall hereinafter be

collectively referred to as “Employer" or “Employers.”

6. The true names and capacities, whether corporate, individual, associate or

otherwise, of Defendants designated herein as Does l to 50, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff,

who therefore sues such Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this

2. -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 v ‘
'

x.

1 Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when the same have been ascertained.

2 7. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the

3 “Defendants is in some manner intentionally, negligently, or otherwise responsible for the acts,

4 occurrences and transactions alleged herein.

5 8. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that in performing the

6 unlawful acts alleged herein, each Defendant was the agent, employee and representative of each

7 of the remaining Defendants, and in doing the unlawful things alleged was acting within the

8 course, purpose, scope and authority of such agency, employment or representation.

CORPORATION

9 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon that basis alleges, that each

10 Defendant was acting partly within and partly without the scope and course oftheir employment,

912-8999
11 and was acting with the knowledge, permission, consent, and ratification of every other

3—222
(909)
12 Defendant.

91786
PROFESSIONAL SUITE 13 10. Employer fostered an environment in which illegal discrimination and
FACSIMILE

Ava,
14 harassment were tolerated and condoned.
CALIFORNIA

o
15 11. Employer allowed its supervisors to perpetrate illegal discrimination and
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
16 harassment at will, without consequence.
FIRM, N. (909)

'1
1042 17 12. Venue is properly laid in this Court inasmuch as certain of the acts upon which

TELEPHONE

LAW 18 Plaintiff sues herein occurred within the County of San Bemardino.

19 13. Whenever and wherever reference is made in this Complaint to any act by a

20 Defendant or Defendants, such allegations and references shall also be deemed to be the acts and
HANNEMANN

21 failures of each Defendant acting individually, jointly and severally.

22 14. Plaintiff received right-to-sue letters from the Department of Fair Employment

23 and Housing with respect to his statutory claims under the Government Code, and has thus,

24 exhausted his administrative remedies.

25 QPERATIVE FACTS
26 15. Employer is the City of Montclair, California. Per the City of Montclair website,
II

27 "Montclair is a full-service City with its own Police and Fire Departments and has a young and

28 diverse population that represents the ethnic and cultural diversity that is characteristic of

- 3 -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 \I
‘
'

y
Southern California." www.citvotmontclaimrg.

Ix)
l6. Employer hired Plaintiff in 2014 as a paid Junior Intern. At all relevant times,

Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant City of Montclair, and Plaintiff performed his job duties

with diligence and professionalism. As a result, Plaintiff earned various raises and promotions.

Plaintiff’s currently position is Senior IT Specialist.

17. Defendant Benjamin Isaac "Ben" Lopez is a male. Defendant Lopez is

OOOONONMkw

commonly known at work as “Ben.“ At all relevant times, Employer employed Lopez as a City

Council member.

CORPORATION

18. Lopez exercised supervisory duties and was Plaintiff‘s supervisor. Lopez

exercised authority which was not of a merely routine or clerical nature, and using his

2-8999
independent judgment, in the interest ofthe Employer, to hire. transfer, suspend, lay off, recall.

91

8—222
(909)
promote, discharge, assign, reward, 0r discipline Plaintiff or the responsibility to direct Plaintiff,

786

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
9] or to adjust his grievances, or effectively to recommend that action.
FACSIMILF.

Ava,

p—d—ou—d—an—flu—np—Iu—nu—a
19. During Plaintiff‘s employment with Employer, Lopez engaged in continuous,
CALIFORNIA

<2.

unwanted harassing conduct directed at Plaintiff, that was visual, verbal, physical and included
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

\oooflmmhwwfl

UPLAND,
unwanted sexual advances. and occurred without Plaintiff‘s consent and was at a1! times
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 unwanted. The unwanted harassing conduct was severe and pervasive, occurring regularly and

LAw
TELEPHONE

directed at Plaintiff, which caused Plaintiff harm. Employer was aware. or should have been

aware of Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct, and failed to perform any immediate or

appropriate investigation or any immediate or appropriate corrective action. Employer's

failure

HANNEMANN

was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff harm.

20. Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct offended. humiliated, distressed, and

affected
intruded upon Plaintiffso as to disrupt Plaintiff‘s emotional tranquility in the workplace,

Plaintiff‘s ability lo perform his job as usual, and interfered with and undermined Plaintiff‘s

personal sense ofwell-being.

2 1. By way of example. Lopez, who presents and acts as a heterosexual male

who openly homosexual, all oflhe

holding staunch anti-LGBTQ views. said t0 Plaintiff, is

acts with Defendant

following sexual comments inviting Plaintiffto engage in homosexual sex

_ 4 _

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNC'l'lVl-I RELIEF

 Lopez:

° "I'm definitely interested in playing."

° "I love eating ass."

- "I prefer to top, but I don't have to top to have fim. Love getting my dick sucked
OOOQOMAWNn—n

all the time."

- "Definitely into oral, love rimming. Jerking is always a given. lol. Love

sucking nips. More top than bottom here. Masc guy."

22. Lopez’s sexual cements caused Plaintiff to suffer emotional distress.

CORPORATION

23. Lopez also subjected Plaintiff to other unwanted sexual advances and come-ons,

"including unwanted messages on social media platforms.

2-8999
24. By way of example, Lopez subjected Plaintiff to unwanted verbal harassing
91

3-222
(909)
conduct in the form of impermissible non-job related questions, in particular, questions regarding
786

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91 Plaintifi‘s sexual preferences and sexuality.
FACSIMILE

Ava,
25. By way of example, Lopez pressured and cajoled Plaintifi' to accompany Lopez
CALIFORNIA

o
out for dimer. This caused Plaintiff to suffer emotional distress.
A MOUNTAIN
980—7878

UPLAND,
26. Plaintiff opposed and complained about Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 directly to Lopez as well as to Employer's City Manager, Edward Starr. Despite Plaintiff‘s

complaints, Employer failed to take an immediate and appropriate corrective action. Instead,
TELEPHONE

LAw

~NNNNNNNN-wHH~HHHH
mfiGMhWNF-‘OOOOQQU‘#WN~O

Employer required Plaintiff to continue to work alongside Lopez.

27. Plaintiff‘s relationships with Defendants became strained as a result of Plaintifl‘

HANNEMANN

complaining about and opposing Lopez‘s unwanted sexual harassing conduct such that Employer

retaliated against Plaintiff.

28. By way of example, Employer obligated Plaintifl‘ to attend city functions as part

of his job duties and interact with Lopez despite Plaintiffs requests to not have to see Lopez at

work. Whenever Lopez interacted with Plaintiff after Plaintiff‘s complaints against Lopez, Lopez

glared at Plaintiff in an intimidating manner, ignored Plaintiff, or otherwise treated Plaintifi‘ in an

unfair manner so as to punish Plaintiff for complaining against Lopez. Plaintiff complained about

these incidents to Employer, to no avail. This caused Plaintiff emotional distress.

. 5 -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 I
'

\z \.«

29. Employer had a duty under the law to have conducted an immediate and

appropriate investigation into Plaintifl‘s complaints of Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct.

30. Employer had a duty under the law to take immediate and appropriate corrective

action in response to complaints of Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct.

\OOOQQLl‘émNn—n

3 l. Despite Plaintiff‘s complaints about Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct,

,among other things, Employer failed to conduct any legitimate immediate or appropriate

investigation or take any legitimate immediate or appropriate corrective action. Employer's

failure to do so amounts to adoption and approval of Lopez's actions by Employer. Following

CORPORATION

Plaintiff's complaints of Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct, Employer continued to employ

Lopez in a supervisory capacity, thus becoming an abettor to Lopez‘s illegal conduct.

912—8999
32. Instead of investigating and taking corrective action as required by law,

3-222
Employer engaged in a systematic pattern of retaliation by taking an adverse job action against
(909)

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91786

Plaintiff, thus causing Plaintiff mental anguish and frustration, all in an effort to retaliate against

Facsmu

AVE,
Plaintifi‘ for his opposition to and reporting of Lopez's unwanted harassing conduct.
CALIFORNIA

o
33. Employer subjected Plaintiff to working conditions that violate established
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
California law. California law embodies a strong public policy of allowing employees to work in
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 an environment free of unwanted harassing conduct of a sexual nature, and for employers to

LAW
TELEPHONE
NNNNNNNNN—‘HHr—AHI—Ar—IHHH

promptly investigate and take corrective action to stop the harassment. Employer at no point in

Plaintiff's
time did any legitimate investigation or took any legitimate corrective action despite
mflO‘MAwNHOOOONO\M&th-do

repeated complaints to all who would listen.

HANNEMANN

34. Employer by and through the acts of Lopez and others, created the hostile work

environment, and knowingly allowed it to persist, over Plaintiffs objections and complaints that

the unwanted harassing conduct was offensive to him and was causing him emotional distress

and anxiety.

35. Plaintiff has not been made aware of any legitimate investigation by Employer

[into Plaintiff‘s report of unwanted harassing conduct against Lopez.

F

36. Plaintiff has not been made aware of any corrective action imposed or taken by

Employer as the result of Plaintiff‘s report of unwanted harassing conduct against Lopez.

5- -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCI'IVE RELIEF

 '
‘

\V’ x.

37. Plaintiff has not been made aware of any discipline imposed or taken by

Employer against Lopez as the result of Plaintiffs report of unwanted harassing conduct against

|Lopez.

EIRST CAU§E 0F ACTION

\OOOQQLAAUJNp—n
(Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation

in Violation of Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § l2940(a)
—

Against Employer Defendants and DOES I to 25)

38. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein all of the preceding paragraphs as if

CORPORATION

fully set forth herein.

39. Plaintiff’s gender is male. Plaintifi’s sexual orientation is homosexual. Plaintiff

2-8999
was and is at all times material hereto an employee covered by Cal. Gov ’t.
Code § 12940
91

B-222
(909)
prohibiting discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation.

PROFESSIONAL
SUrl‘E
91786

40. Employer Defendants and DOES 1 to 25 were at all times material hereto
FACSIMILE

employers within the meaning of Gov

AVE.,
't.
Code § 12926(d) and, as such, are barred from
CALIFORNIA

o
discriminating in employment decisions on the basis of sexual orientation as set forth in Gov ’t.

A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
Code § 12940.
FIRM, N. (909)

1042
NNNNNNNNNv—tv—‘v—IHH—av—Ir—In—Ir—I

41. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged above, constitutes

LAW
TELEPHONE

unlawfill sexual orientation discrimination under Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § 12940 in that Plaintiff was

subjected to adverse treatment, denied equal treatment and opportunities, and otherwise

OOQONUIAUJN—‘COWNJQMAWNHO
discriminated against on account of his sexual orientation.
HANNEMANN

42. None of the discriminatory conduct of Defendants, or any of them, as alleged

above, was based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.

43. As a direct, foreseeable and legal result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has

suffered emotional distress, including but not limited to, embarrassment, humiliation, mental

anguish, and related mental, physical and emotional symptoms related thereto, all to Plaintiff’s

damages in an amount according to proof. Furthermore, Plaintiff has incurred substantial losses

incurred in seeking substitute employment and in earnings, bonuses, deferred compensation, and

other employment benefits. Plaintifi‘ is thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in

- 7 -

COMPLAINT Iron DAMAGES AND INJUNcnvs RELIEF

 '

x, x.

amounts to be proven at trial.

-
44. Employer Defendants and Does 1 25 committed the acts alleged herein

willfully, maliciously, fraudulently and oppressively with the wrongful intentions of injuring

Plaintiff, from a willful improper motive amounting to malice, and in conscious disregard of

KOOOQOUI-hWNu—a

Plaintiff’s rights and for the deleterious consequences of the Employer Defendants’ and Does’ l
-

25 actions.

45. As a result of the Employer Defendants’ and Does’ 1 - 25 discriminatory

conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit as

CORPORATION

provided by Cal. Gov’t. Code § 12965(b).

SECOND QAUSE 0F ACTION

2-8999
(Discrimination Based on Gender
91
in Violation of Cal. Gov ’t.
Code § 12940(a)
—
8-222
(909)

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91786
Against Employer Defendants and DOES 1 to 25)
FAGIMILE

Ava,
46. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein all of the preceding paragraphs as if
CALIFORNIA

o
fully set forth herein.
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
47. Plaintiff‘s gender is male. Plaintiff is and was at all times material hereto a
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 NNNNNNNNNr—Iv—IHI—Iu—nv—‘u—an—Ar—n
male employee covered by Cal. Gov 't. Code § 12940 prohibiting discrimination in employment

on the basis of gender.

TELEPHONE

LAW

OOQQMAWNF‘OWNQQMAWNI—‘o

48. Employer Defendants and DOES l to 25 were at all times material hereto

employers within the meaning of Gov ’t. Code § 12926(d) and, as such, are barred
from
HANNEMANN

discriminating in employment decisions on the basis of gender as set forth in Gov ’t. Code §

12940.

49. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, as alleged above, constitutes

unlawful gender discrimination under Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § 12940 in that Plaintiff was subjected to

adverse treatment, denied equal treatment and opportunities, and otherwise discriminated against

on account of his gender.

50. None of the discriminatory conduct of Defendants, or any of them, as alleged

above, was based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.

- s _

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

o
 ‘
‘

x. \_.

5 1. As a direct, foreseeable and legal result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has

suffered emotional distress, including but not limited to, embarrassment, humiliation, mental

anguish, and related mental, physical and emotional symptoms related thereto, all to Plaintiffs

damages in an amount according to proof. Furthermore, Plaintiff has incurred substantial losses

incurred in seeking substitute employment and in earnings, bonuses, deferred compensation, and
\OWQONUIAUJNH

other employment benefits. Plaintifi‘ is thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in

amounts to be proven at trial.

52. Employer Defendants and Does l - 25 committed the acts alleged herein
fl
CORPORATION

willfully, maliciously, fraudulently and oppressively with the wrongful intentions of injuring

Plaintiff, from a willful improper motive amounting to malice, and in conscious disregard of

2-8999
Plaintiff’s rights and for the deleterious consequences of the Employer Defendants’ and Does’ 1 —

91

8-222
(909)
25 actions.

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91786

53. As a result of the Employer Defendants’ and Does’ 1 - 25 discriminatory

FACSIMILE

Ava,
conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attomeys’ fees and costs of suit as
CALIFORNIA

<>

provided by Cal. Gov't. Code § 12965(b).

A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
TH] AUSE OF ACTI
FIRM,
N. (909)

1042
(Unlawful Harassment Based on Sex,

LAW
TELEPHONE

NNNNNNNNNr—n—‘fl—Iflp—Iu—IHHH
Cal. Gov't. Code§ 129400) —
WQO‘MhWND—‘OOOOQC‘MAWND—‘o

Against All Defendants)

54. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein all of the preceding paragraphs as if

HANNEMANN

“fully set forth herein.

55. Plaintifi‘ is and was at all times material hereto a male employee covered by Cal.

Gov ’t.
Code 12940 prohibiting harassment in employment on the basis of sex.
§

56. Defendants are and were at all times material hereto employers within the

meaning of Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § 12926(d) and, as such, are
barred from harassing an employee on

the basis of sex as set forth in Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § 12940.

57. In perpetrating the acts and omissions as described above, Defendants, and/or

their agents/employees, engaged in a pattern and practice of unlawful sexual harassment in

- 9 _

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Cal. Gov ’t.
Code § 129400)) by

subjecting Plaintiff to and refilsing and failing to protect Plaintiff from the offensive and abusive

treatment and hostile work environment described herein.

58. The harassment was sufficiently severe and / or pervasive as to alter the

\OOOflQM-FWNp—a
conditions of employment and to create a hostile or abusive working environment.

59. As a direct, foreseeable and legal result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has

suffered emotional distress, including but not limited to, embarrassment, humiliation, mental

anguish, and related mental, physical and emotional symptoms related thereto, all to Plaintiff’s

CORPORATION

damages in an amount according to proof. Furthermore, Plaintiff has incurred substantial losses

in seeking substitute employment and in earnings, bonuses, deferred compensation, and other

2-8999

employment benefits, and has incurred and/or will incur medical expenses for treatment by
91

8-222
(909)
psychotherapists and/or other health professionals and for other incidental expenses. Plaintiff is

thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at

91786
PROFESSIONAL Sun'E trial.
FAGMLE

AVE,
60. All Defendants committed the acts alleged herein willfully, maliciously,
CAuFonNIA

o
fraudulently and oppressively with the wrongful intentions of injuring Plaintiff, from a willful
A MOUNTAIN
980.7878

UPLAND,
improper motive amounting to malice, and in conscious disregard of Plaintifi’s rights and for the
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 deleterious consequences of the Defendants’ actions. Defendants and each of them, and/or their
NNNNNNNNNflHh—IHHflHI—n—Iu—I

agents/employees or supervisors authorized, condoned, and ratified the unlawful conduct of each
TELEPHONE

LAW

”\IQMAWNHoowflGMAWNi-‘o

other.

61. As a result of the Defendants’ harassing acts as alleged herein, Plaintiff is

HANNEMANN

entitled to reasonable attomeys’ fees and costs of suit as provided by Cal. Gov ’t. Code §

12965(b).

FOURTH CAUSE 0F ACTION

(Failure To Prevent Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation,

Cal. Gov’t. Code § 12940(k)

—

Against Employer Defendants and DOES 1 to 25)

62. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein all of the preceding paragraphs as if

Ifully set forth herein.

- 10 -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 63. At all times herein, Employer Defendants and Does 1—25, and each of them,

knew or reasonably should have known that the conduct alleged herein would and did

proximately cause the physical and emotional distress to Plaintiff as alleged above.

64. At all times herein, Employer Defendants and Does 1-25, and each of them, had

the power, ability, authority and duty to cease the conduct alleged above and to intervene to
\OOOQQMAUJN—

prevent or prohibit such conduct.

65. In violation of Cal. Gov ’t.

Code § 1294000, Employer Defendants and Does 1-

25, through their officers, managing agents and/or supervisors, failed to take all reasonable steps

CORPORATION

necessary to prevent the above-alleged harassment from occum'ng.

66. As a direct, foreseeable and legal result of Employer Defendants’ and Does’ 1-

2-8999
25 actions, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer substantial embarrassment, extreme and
91

8-222
severe humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress, pain and suffering, all to Plaintiff’s
(909)

PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91786

damage in an amount according to proof. Furthermore, Plaintiff has incurred substantial losses
FACSIMILE

AVE,
in seeking substitute employment and in earnings, bonuses, deferred compensation, and other
CALIFORNIA

o
employment benefits, and has incurred and/or will incur medical expenses for treatment by
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
psychotherapists and/or other health professionals and for other incidental expenses. Plaintiff is
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial.

NNNNNNNNNflpr—Iu—I—iwv—‘Hp—n

LAw
TELEPHONE

67. Employer Defendants and Does 1-25 committed the acts alleged herein

®Q¢M¥WNflOOWQQM#MN—’o

maliciously, fraudulently, and oppressively with the wrongful intention of injuring Plaintiff and

in conscious disregard of Plaintifi‘s rights and for the deleterious consequences of the Employer
HANNEMANN

“Defendants’ and Does’ 1-25 actions. Employer Defendants and Does 1-25, through their

officers, managing agents and/or supervisors, authorized, condoned and ratified the unlawful

conduct of all of the other Defendants named in this action.

68. As a result of Employer Defendants’ and Does’ 1-25 conduct as alleged herein,

Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit as provided by Cal. Gov ’t. Code

§ 129650;).

FIFTH CAUSE 0F ACTION

(Retaliation -

- 1 1 -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 Cal. Gov’t. Code § 12940(h)
—

Against Employer Defendants and DOES 1 to 25)

69. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all paragraphs above, as if fully set

herein by reference.

\OOOQQMAUJNr—I

70. Ca]. Government Code § 12940(h) provides that it is unlawful for an employer

to retaliate against an employee for engaging in a protected activity, such as complaining about

discrimination or harassment.

71. Employer Defendants were substantially motivated to retaliate against Plaintiff

CORPORATION

because he complained about discrimination, harassment and/or disparate treatment.

72. As a proximate result of Defendants’ wrongfifl conduct, and each of them,

912—3999
Plaintiff has suffered and continues to sustain substantial losses in earnings and other

8-222
(909)
employment benefits in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.

PROFESSIONAL SurrE
91785

73. As a proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, and each of them,

FacsanE

Ava,
Plaintiff has suffered humiliation, emotional distress, and mental pain and anguish, all to his
CALIFORNIA

o
damage in an amount according to proof at the time of trial.
A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,
74. Plaintiff has also incurred and continues to incur attorneys’ fees and legal
FIRM, N. (909)

1042 expenses in an amount according to proof at the time of trial"

NNNNNNNNNr—Iu—Iu—dHr—Ir—A—nu—AHH

LAW
TELEPHONE

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EDMUND GARCIA prays for judgment against Defendants,
and each of them, and requests relief as follows:
OONO‘MAUJN—‘OWOOQQMAWNHO

HANNEMANN

l. For general and special damages according to proof at the time of trial;

2. For economic damages including loss of earnings, interest, and other

employment benefits, lost future earnings, a blot on Plaintiff’s employment history, lack of

references, and other consequential damages;

3. For compensatory damages for losses resulting from humiliation, mental

anguish, and emotional distress according to proof;

4. For reasonable attomeys’ fees in an amount according to proof;

5. For injunctive relief against discriminatory, harassing, and retaliatory practices

_ 12 -

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCI'WE RELIEF

 by Defendants;

[\J
6. For costs of suit incurred herein;

7. For prejudgment interest according to law; and

8. For such other and further reliefas the Court deems just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL:

Plaintiff EDMUND GARCIA hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

HANNEMANN LAW FIRM, A

a (AP
Dated: December 7, 2021 Professional Corporation
KATHLEEN DOHERTY, ESQ.
CORPORATION

By:
Brian G. Hannemann, Esq.
912-8999 Kathleen Doherty, Esq.
Attomeys for Plaintiff,
8-222
(909)
EDMUND GARCIA
786 F.
PROFESSIONAL SUITE
91

FACSIMII

Avr-..,

CALIFORNIA

A MOUNTAIN
980-7878

UPLAND,

FIRM, N. (909)

1042

TELEPHONE

LAW

HANNEMANN

- 1 3 _

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 v ”l

x,
fig“x F I u r . av GAVINW
KEVIN KISH. DIRECTOR

w a D EPARTMENT 0F F AIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING

i—‘J 2218 Kausen Drive. Suite 100 Elk Grove CA 95758
l I I

(800) 884-1684 (Voice) (aoo) 700-2320 (rm: Calnornia's Relay Service

1 ax 711
\. h1tp:l/www.dfeh.ca.gov I Email: contact‘center@dfeh.ca.gov

December 2, 2021

Kathleen Doherty
1042 N. Mountain Ave.. Suite 8-596
Upland, California 91786

RE: Notice to Complainant’s Attorney

DFEH Matter Number: 2021 12~1 5532202
Right to Sue: Garcia / City of Montclair et al.

Dear Kathleen Doherty:

Attached a copy of your complaint of discrimination filed with the Department of Fair
is

Employment and Housing (DFEH) pursuant to the California Fair Employment and
Housing Act, Government Code section 12900 et seq. Also attached is a copy of your
Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue.

Pursuant to Government Code section 12962, DFEH will not serve these
documents on the employer. You must serve the complaint separateiy, to all named
respondents. Please refer to the attached Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue for
information regarding filing a private lawsuit in the State of California. A courtesy "Notice
of Filing of Discrimination Complaint" is attached for your convenience.

Be advised that the DFEH does not review or edit the complaint form to ensure that it

meets procedural or statutory requirements.

Sincerely,

Department of Fair Employment and Housing

DFEH-ENF 80 RS
 v '
‘

w
’MM‘N‘
x
WWWWWWMMW
DEPARTMENT 0F FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
GAVIN NEWSOALQQMEBNQB
KEV’NK'S” ”mm"
w
L2 a
W'

2218 Kausen Drive. Suite 100 Elk Grove CA 95753

I I I

(800) 884-1684 (Voice): (800) 700-2320 (Tm California's Relay Service ax 711
K.“ _V
|

http:l/www.dleh.ca.gov Email: contact.cenler@dfeh.ca.gov

I

December 2, 2021

RE: Notice of Filing of Discrimination Complaint

DFEH Matter Number: 2021 12—1 5532202
Right to Sue: Garcia / City of Montclair et al.

To All Respondent(s):

Enclosed is a copy of a complaint of discrimination that has been filed with the
Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) in accordance with Government
Code section 12960. This constitutes service of the complaint pursuant to Government
Code section 12962. The complainant has requested an authorization to file a lawsuit. A
copy of the Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue is enclosed for your records.

This matter may qualify for DFEH’s Small Employer Family Leave Mediation pilot
program. Under this program, established under Government Code section 12945.21,
a small employer with 5 -19 employees, charged with violation of the California Family
Rights Act, Government Code section 12945.2, has the right to participate in DFEH‘s
free voluntary mediation service. Under this program both the employee requesting an
immediate right to sue and the employer charged with the violation may request that all
parties participate in DFEH’s free voluntary mediation service. A request for mediation
must be made within 3O days of receipt of the Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue.
If mediation is requested, the employee is prohibited from filing a civil action until

mediation is complete. The employee’s statute of limitations to file a civil action,

including for all related claims not arising under section 12945.2, is tolled from DFEH‘s
receipt of a mediation request under section 12945.21 until mediation is complete. To
request DFEH Small Employer Family Leave Mediation, email
DRDOnIinerequests@dfeh.ca.gov and include the DFEH matter number indicated on
the Right to Sue notice.

Please refer to the attached complaint for a list of all respondent(s) and their contact
information.

No response to DFEH is requested or required.

Sincerely,

Department of Fair Employment and Housing

DFEH-ENF 80 RS
 v V
”.er ’\
’

i I n GAVIN NEWW
0mm"
“EV“ “‘5”
DEPARTMENT 0F FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
,

w m
i—‘-‘
2218 Kausen Drive. Suite 100 Elk Grove CA 95758
I l I

(800) 884-1684 (Voice) (BOO) 700-2320 (TTY) California's Relay Service

I
|
ax 711
\._/ hxtp://www.dfthca.gov I Email: contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov

December 2, 2021

Edmund Garcia
’

RE: Notice of Case Closure and Right to Sue

DFEH Matter Number: 2021 12-15532202
Right to Sue: Garcia / City of Montclair et al.

Dear Edmund Garcia:

This letter informs you that the above-referenced complaint filed with the Department of
FairEmployment and Housing (DFEH) has been closed effective December 2, 2021
because an immediate Right to Sue notice was requested.

This also your Right to Sue notice. According to Government Code section
letter is
12965, subdivision (b), a civil action may be brought under the provisions of the Fair
Employment and Housing Act against the person, employer, labor organization or
employment agency named in the above-referenced complaint. The civil action must be
filed within one year from the date of this letter.

This matter may qualify for DFEH’s Small Employer Family Leave Mediation pilot
program. Under this program, established under Government Code section 12945.21, a
small employer with 5 -19 employees, charged with violation of the California Family
Rights Act, Government Code section 12945.2, has the right to participate in DFEH's
free voluntary mediation service. Under this program both the employee requesting an
immediate right to sue and the employer charged with the violation may request that all
parties participate in DFEH's free voluntary mediation service. A request for mediation
must be submitted to the DFEH within 30 days of receipt of the Notice of Case Closure
and Right Sue. If mediation is requested, the employee is prohibited from filing a civil
to
action until mediation is complete. The employee's statute of limitations to file a civil

action, including for all related claims not arising under section 12945.2, is tolled from
DFEH’s receipt of a mediation request under section 12945.21 until mediation is
complete. To request DFEH Small Employer Family Leave Mediation, email
DRDOnIinerequests@dfeh.ca.gov and include the DFEH matter number indicated on
the Right to Sue notice.

To Sue notice, you must contact the U.S. Equal Employment

obtain a federal Right to
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to file a complaint within 30 days of receipt of this
DFEH Notice of Case Closure or within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act,
whichever is earlier.

Sincerely,

DFEH-ENF 80 RS
’flw‘x
\J

DEPARTMENT 0F FAIR EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING

WW GAVIN WWW
KEVIN XISH. DIRECTOR

Q)“
«w 2218 Kausen Drive. SuiKe 100 Elk Grove CA 95758
I I l

(800) 884.1684 (Voice) (800) 700-2320 (TTY) California's Relay Service

I |
at 711

\._/ hnp:/Iwww.dfeh.ca‘gov l Email: contact.center@d!eh.ca.gov

Department of Fair Employment and Housing

DFEH-ENF 80 RS
 COMPLAINT OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act
(Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.)

In the Matter of the Complaint of

(DmNOJU'I-kwN—x

Edmund Garcia DFEH No. 2021 12-15532202

Complainant,
vs.

City of Montclair
5111 Benito Street
Montclair, CA 91 763

.n
O Benjamin Lopez

A .4

Respondents
_a
N

._\
w

1.Respondent City of Montclair is an employer subject to suit under the California Fair
4.x
U1-# Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.).

2.Complainant is naming Benjamin Lopez individual as Co-Respondent(s).

O)
d
3. Complainant Edmund Garcia, resides in the City of ,
State of.

4—;

mN

4. Complainant alleges that on or about December 2, 2021. respondent took the

following adverse actions:
u—L

Complainant was harassed because of complainant's sexlgender, identity orgender

2 sexual harassment-
expression, sexual orientation, sexual harassment- hostile environment,
JO
quid pro quo.
2
Complainant was discriminated against because of complainant's sex/gender, gender
22
harassment— hostile environment, sexual
identity or expression, sexual orientation, sexual

23 harassment— quid pro quo and as a result of the discrimination was asked impermissible
non-job-related questions, denied any employment benefit or privilege, other, denied work
24 opportunities or assignments.

25

26 -1-

Complaint - DFEH NO. 20211245532202

27
Date Filed: December 2. 2021
28
DFEH-ENF 80 RS
 Complainant experienced because complainant reported or resisted any form
retaliation
of discrimination or harassment, participated as a witness
in a discrimination or harassment
complaint and as a result was asked impermissible non-job-related questions, denied any
employment benefit or privilege, other. denied work opportunities or assignments.

Additional Complaint Details:

CDQNQU'IAOJNA

MNNNNNNNNAAAA—xdda—xd

mflwmth—sommNmG-th—‘O

-2.

Complaint — DFEH No. 2021 1 2-15532202

Date Filed: December 2. 2021

DFEH-ENF 80 RS
 VERIFICATION

l, Kathleen Doherty, am
the Attorney in the above-entitled complaint. have read
l

the foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof. The matters alleged are
based on information and belief, which believe to be true.
|

On December 2, 2021, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State
I

of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

(DmNODOlAOON-t

Upland, CA

NNNNNNNNN—s—n—s—xa—tA—x—L—A

mem-FO’N-‘OCDQNO’WkWN-‘O

~3-
Complaint — DFE‘H No. 20211245532202

Date Filed: December 2, 2021

DFEHcENF 8O RS